Striving for a flattering eulogy

Menu

Through Ground-Colored Glasses

Despite its perch on the deplorable fringe, I’ve come to (perhaps egotistically) view the alt-right as indispensable to any sustainability initiatives in the West. The mainstream right is so co-opted, corrupted, and craven there’s little other source of meaningful dissent than that which percolates up from the springs of Hate.

And thus why it is precisely the left’s primary target.

When a mortal antagonist wields one ruthlessly effective weapon, you can either seek to destroy it or make him choke on it. Failing to do either is fighting machine guns with sling shots. So obviously that’s what conservatives choose.

It’s morbidly amusing to think the left’s entire platform is balanced on the Hate/Racist axis. They simply advance some pernicious issue and declare opposition invalid by virtue of accusation. The subsequent fear of career ruination or imprisonment serve as remarkably compelling tactics of persuasion.

Here’s a couple of recent high profile instances from Europe:Austria

Editor of Austria’s Largest Paper Charged with ‘Hate Speech’ over Migrant Article

On 25 October 2015, Christoph Biro wrote of the masses of migrants who were travelling through the Styrian countryside and remarked on the assaults and property damage committed by migrants, reports Kurier.

He also detailed Afghan men had slashed the seats of the trains that were transporting them to Germany because they refused to sit where Christians had previously sat.

The commentary provoked a negative reaction at the time with 37 complaints lodged against Mr. Biro. He took four weeks off from his position at the time, claiming that he had lost perspective and proportion of the situation.
—
The prosecutor in the Styrian capital of Graz has confirmed they will be seeking charges against Biro for his comments after the case was brought to them by left-wing SOS Mitmensch. The group released a guide for Austrians earlier this year on how to successfully get people tried for hate speech crimes.

No need to inflame the situation by calling migrant sexual assaults “aggressive” when they may have actually been quite tender. Which means the only legal remedy for natives who bristle at watching their ancient nation swarmed by hostile aliens is to sulk…quietly.

The trial of Dutch politician Geert Wilders for inciting hate with his comments about the number of Moroccans in the country can proceed.

Wilders can stand trial on the “suspicion of insulting a group of people based on race and inciting discrimination and hatred,” a Dutch court said Friday. Wilders’ lawyer asked the court to halt prosecution in September, claiming that a judge cannot decide on statements made in a political context. The first hearing in the trial took place on March 18.

Other European court decisions show that members of parliament on the one hand should have a broad freedom to express themselves,” the court said in a statement. Still, politicians have a duty “to prevent making public announcements that feed intolerance.” The court said it’s up to the judge to decide where those boundaries lie.

See, this is why judicial appointments are so critical. They require that rare stock of jurists who have the exquisite discernment to separate peoples’ “broad freedom to express themselves” from “announcements that feed intolerance.” Perhaps that freedom isn’t broad at all when it comes into conflict with a judge’s personal sentiments. I mean if I were presiding, Heidi Beirich would be in the clink for feeding intolerance the moment her massive fleshy pillars sank into Dutch soil. That’s not my preference, it’s just the law. I’m only here to decide where the boundaries lie.

From these fang-bearing displays by the left, conservatives learn nothing.

Alinsky was an incorrigible enemy, but his well-disseminated tactics were wildly successful. Here’s one the right ignores devoutly.

RULE 4: Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity’s very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)

The left is built on a mountain of contradictions. None of which are ever pressed against each other. Fire every anti-white social commenter for racism. Prosecute every interracial attack as a hate crime. Take apart affirmative action as offensive to the liberal principle of anti-racism. Or alternatively, force the Ivy League, the Supreme Court, the Federal Reserve Board, and the NBA to grant admission based strictly on each demographic group’s percentage of the population. Then notice how enthusiastic the country’s kosher two percent remains about the “looks like America” requirement it has so long supported.

While America’s political kingmakers inject their millions into high-profile presidential and congressional contests, Democratic mega-donor George Soros has directed his wealth into an under-the-radar 2016 campaign to advance one of the progressive movement’s core goals — reshaping the American justice system.

The billionaire financier has channeled more than $3 million into seven local district-attorney campaigns in six states over the past year — a sum that exceeds the total spent on the 2016 presidential campaign by all but a handful of rival super-donors.

His money has supported African-American and Hispanic candidates for these powerful local roles, all of whom ran on platforms sharing major goals of Soros’, like reducing racial disparities in sentencing and directing some drug offenders to diversion programs instead of to trial. It is by far the most tangible action in a progressive push to find, prepare and finance criminal justice reform-oriented candidates for jobs that have been held by longtime incumbents and serve as pipelines to the federal courts — and it has inspired fury among opponents angry about the outside influence in local elections.

“The prosecutor exercises the greatest discretion and power in the system. It is so important,” said Andrea Dew Steele, president of Emerge America, a candidate-training organization for Democratic women. “There’s been a confluence of events in the past couple years and all of the sudden, the progressive community is waking up to this.”

Soros knows that people decide the law we actually live under, not parchment. He knows demographics are determinative. He knows that DAs largely decide who will absorb the state’s prosecutorial wrath. And he wants blacks and hispanics dishing it out. You’ll note the absence of public condemnation about Clinton’s moral infirmities. This is a creature focused on grinding enemies rather than stroking his values. The distinction is existential.

The difference between grasping the gritty machinations of men as opposed to watching a ballet of angels is what separates the alt-right from conservatism. Thank God for the clarity of Hate.

Post navigation

20 thoughts on “Through Ground-Colored Glasses”

The only saving grace from the pathetic conservatives is that the left has not known a strong enemy for decades and they are weak. They were not ready for the alt-right and won’t be able to stop getting mauled by the momentum it is generating.

Thats very true. We have ‘conservatives’ like David Brooks, whose guiding light seems to be “progressivism, but lets go a littel bit slower please” and squishy con men like Paul Ryan in congress. I gave up on conservatism a long time ago due to its inability to conserve anything but the ever leftward-shifting status quo. Leftists are weak, and only attack what they perceive as weakness. Will that actually change in the coming years? I honestly don’t know, but it looks a lot more likely than in did in 2012.

As an aside, if the afghans are slashing train seats because they “refuse to sit where christians previously sat” then why do they want to come into a country where christians have lived for centuries, and live in cities built by christians, and apartments where christians used to sleep?

And Porter, “No need to inflame the situation by calling migrant sexual assaults “aggressive” when they may have actually been quite tender.” Thats a great line. As I often do when reading here, I actually laughed out loud and had to read it to my wife. She just rolled her eyes…

Rob, I thought of you on this: A writer with the last name Nguyen is urging his fellow Irishmen to rally against “white privilege.” Of course the injustice of Asian Privilege in say Cambodia hasn’t yet migrated onto the pages of the Irish Times–though we expect the Nguyens of the world to take it up any moment now.

I’ve written on this several times, though still the idea amazes me that people think whites shouldn’t have privilege in the countries they carved out of the hillsides. What the hell was the state formed for if not to be beneficial to them and their posterity? Was the Irish War of Independence fought for the welfare of those in Phnom Penh? It’s sophistry that’s gained sufficient traction to become convention.

I saw that Nguyen piece. The worst part of it is that virtually all politicians in Western Europe and the US are too cucked to provide even the weakest counter argument, i.e. that our countries are by definition meant to privilege those who belong there by ancestry. I can’t remember the last time I heard one of them give an argument against immigration that wasn’t framed in terms of what’s best for the immigrants.

I do not intend to talk to the lunatic fringe that grows like fungus on the left. Law is a meaningless proposition when it protects criminals. Let them curse, or call names. Their blood will flow as freely from their veins if their mouths are open or shut. Force can tame a savage beast, and make a coward cringe. Those too dumb to understand an argument still have a central nervous system that can register pain. Some say violence does not solve problems. Violence doesn’t need to solve problems. It just needs to make it go away.

Ditto that, Joshua.
This piece made me contemplate whether the SJWs have any end game in mind for their pogrom of the normal. Perhaps they are trapped in a cycle of ever-escalating and ridiculous attacks and can’t figure out the soft landing. Can they really believe that in a country whose native stock has perhaps 400 million guns, that this can end well? Perhaps they are counting on the converged military to save their bacon. Any adoption of Alinsky like tactics, therefore, has to include either recapturing the military, or cutting off the lifeblood of poor rural white recruits through social stigmatization. No more “support our troops” bullshit. If you enlisted after 2008, you did so knowing full well you were supporting the enemy.

Speaking of Alinsky tactics, maybe a kickstarter to relocate Syrians and Somalis to Paul Ryan’s home district from current battleground districts could have some legs. If we get WI-1 from the current 91% white to about 75%, that would serve him and those fuckers right

A friend of mine likes to point out that here in Oregon, judges [almost?] never retire at the official end of their tenures. They retire mid-term, another judge is appointed in their place by the always-Democrat governor, and that new judge runs virtually without opposition as the incumbent. And, you guessed it, is elected.